No. We want people who at least half-know what they're doing before they put their hands on nuclear reactors/people's internals/motorized vehicles etc, just like you (assumed) europeans do. Of course, most of this is moot because licensing has become little more than a papermill industry shim between real life applicant experience and HR department expectations.
Of course licensing is unequal: only those who can pass the tests can be licensed. Some can do it while others can't. Welcome to life, we are NOT equal. We are diverse. As a result, I do not have a problem with testing for ability. However, I do have one with the many licensing schemes that fail to do this while producing armies of half useless paper-mill drones. It's turned into a system wide scam.
Only as long as google continues to play the socjus game. If they did nothing and let the paper sit there and collect support/criticism like any other, it would've eventually blown over. Too many corporates are bending knee to this shit. They need to stop. It's costing them money and damaging society as a whole.
I guarantee that such a filter will have a steadily widening target. 'Advertiser friendly' content is basically anything bland and boring enough to appear in mainstream media. Basically anything important will be demonetized unless the viewpoint conforms with the status quo pushed by large organizations, public and private.
or maybe hollywood is too dumb to understand conservative messages...or perhaps it's both. Ideologues hate free expression and debate of other positions. It doesn't matter what their ideological bases are. The worst ones are those who want to use institutional power to impose themselves on others.
Those old action movies (many of which also have truly liberal themes btw) have far more depth to them than just about any movie made today. With all the thinly disguised hyper-left themed propagandic elements imposed by virtue signaling studios, they seem more like the boring, preachy 'educational' videos imposed on children in school than entertainment.
There cannot be perfect equality, but when one aggregates a huge sample, the statistical centers for each gender group should be roughly the same, because with a large enough sample, individual deviations for things like actual hours worked and the strengths and weaknesses for particular work-related skills should even-out.
This is a false assumption because it assumes that men and women are essentially the same minus some plumbing. This couldn't be further from the truth. Sex is an example of diversity so it puzzles me why progressives expect equal outcome. Trying to force it is illiberal and immoral. It demonizes men and infantilizes women.
It's possible that there are careers that would favor one gender over another, but those are mostly lower-skilled jobs that require brute strength. Even a lot of low-skill jobs should be roughly at parity, because there are a lot of labor-saving devices that any able-bodied individual can use.
There are fundamental biological differences at work. It's not just plumbing and muscles. The neurology and endocrinology is different too, and that affects temperament and imperatives which in turn affect life choices and priorities.
Neither gender really has any advantage over the other in this scenario, so there should be no reason to pay either gender more than the other for this sort of work.
From this I can tell you've never worked a day in a factory of any sort.
Why not? Such communities generalize the hell out of those who do not put SocJus first.
No. You're seeing the vitriol here because it can be freely critiqued. Those onerous CoCs just tell technically minded people that those projects are about politics first, technology second..or dead last.
I don't support collectivization either but you're comparing apples and oranges.
A home has natural scarcity and is easily quantized. Expression is not. Ideas are not. This is why copyright infringement is not the same as theft. Copyright provides temporary scarcity at society's expense so that you can profit from your work. However, at some point, ideas become part of the society's culture/general knowledgebase, and allowing the creator to remain the bridge troll indefinitely deters progress. This is especially true in science and technology where the IP stack becomes very expensive very quickly.
Want another house? Build one. Want more scarcity? Come up with a new idea. It was not meant to protect one trick ponies forever. 14+14 was quite generous (~half a lifetime). Later revisions were even more so. Today it's egregious.
So therefore, what? The bloody mess (oh excuse me, 'failure modes') that gets us there is justified? They can't/won't even fully automate trains yet. Lets start with that one first.
Slashdot Mirror
No. We want people who at least half-know what they're doing before they put their hands on nuclear reactors/people's internals/motorized vehicles etc, just like you (assumed) europeans do. Of course, most of this is moot because licensing has become little more than a papermill industry shim between real life applicant experience and HR department expectations.
Of course licensing is unequal: only those who can pass the tests can be licensed. Some can do it while others can't. Welcome to life, we are NOT equal. We are diverse. As a result, I do not have a problem with testing for ability. However, I do have one with the many licensing schemes that fail to do this while producing armies of half useless paper-mill drones. It's turned into a system wide scam.
..and why is one person posting a paper on a politically charged subject now considered a 'creating a hostile work environment' in the first place?
..and why is one person posting a paper on a politically charged subject now considered a 'creating a hostile work environment'?
Sure it is as long as you conform to the BSD license.
Only as long as google continues to play the socjus game. If they did nothing and let the paper sit there and collect support/criticism like any other, it would've eventually blown over. Too many corporates are bending knee to this shit. They need to stop. It's costing them money and damaging society as a whole.
If you think this is about a few malcontents saying nasty things about female coworkers, then it is you who is making the workplace hostile.
So you're all for this if youtube deems your videos EC-10:CONDEMNED?
I guarantee that such a filter will have a steadily widening target. 'Advertiser friendly' content is basically anything bland and boring enough to appear in mainstream media. Basically anything important will be demonetized unless the viewpoint conforms with the status quo pushed by large organizations, public and private.
That depends on which feminist you ask.
or maybe hollywood is too dumb to understand conservative messages. ..or perhaps it's both. Ideologues hate free expression and debate of other positions. It doesn't matter what their ideological bases are. The worst ones are those who want to use institutional power to impose themselves on others.
Those old action movies (many of which also have truly liberal themes btw) have far more depth to them than just about any movie made today. With all the thinly disguised hyper-left themed propagandic elements imposed by virtue signaling studios, they seem more like the boring, preachy 'educational' videos imposed on children in school than entertainment.
There cannot be perfect equality, but when one aggregates a huge sample, the statistical centers for each gender group should be roughly the same, because with a large enough sample, individual deviations for things like actual hours worked and the strengths and weaknesses for particular work-related skills should even-out.
This is a false assumption because it assumes that men and women are essentially the same minus some plumbing. This couldn't be further from the truth. Sex is an example of diversity so it puzzles me why progressives expect equal outcome. Trying to force it is illiberal and immoral. It demonizes men and infantilizes women.
It's possible that there are careers that would favor one gender over another, but those are mostly lower-skilled jobs that require brute strength. Even a lot of low-skill jobs should be roughly at parity, because there are a lot of labor-saving devices that any able-bodied individual can use.
There are fundamental biological differences at work. It's not just plumbing and muscles. The neurology and endocrinology is different too, and that affects temperament and imperatives which in turn affect life choices and priorities.
Neither gender really has any advantage over the other in this scenario, so there should be no reason to pay either gender more than the other for this sort of work.
From this I can tell you've never worked a day in a factory of any sort.
Whoever makes the claim should make the case. All of this "listen and believe" crap we get is why fewer and fewer take the accusations at face value.
No the shortages are from fucking idiots who think they can mine their way to retirement.
I bet the virtualization is all in the driver anyway.
No thanks. Don't need a ton of bullshit character spam.
I freely admit that chem isn't my area, but maybe just use some
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
and call it a day.
Why not? Such communities generalize the hell out of those who do not put SocJus first.
No. You're seeing the vitriol here because it can be freely critiqued. Those onerous CoCs just tell technically minded people that those projects are about politics first, technology second..or dead last.
boring.. fire's so overused. How about a superacid?
Well linux provides a toggle for the fix. AFAIK, windows does not.
I don't support collectivization either but you're comparing apples and oranges.
A home has natural scarcity and is easily quantized. Expression is not. Ideas are not. This is why copyright infringement is not the same as theft. Copyright provides temporary scarcity at society's expense so that you can profit from your work. However, at some point, ideas become part of the society's culture/general knowledgebase, and allowing the creator to remain the bridge troll indefinitely deters progress. This is especially true in science and technology where the IP stack becomes very expensive very quickly.
Want another house? Build one. Want more scarcity? Come up with a new idea. It was not meant to protect one trick ponies forever. 14+14 was quite generous (~half a lifetime). Later revisions were even more so. Today it's egregious.
Yet around here, it seems most of the bitching comes from non-Americans bitching about what they think Americans should like.
They vote for left leaning tyrants. No better than religious fundamentalists.
Yeah, until the first bored teenager with a laptop at an overpass has his way with the mesh network of cars...
So therefore, what? The bloody mess (oh excuse me, 'failure modes') that gets us there is justified? They can't/won't even fully automate trains yet. Lets start with that one first.